ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2024
The salvage lenvatinib-based regimen provides survival benefit in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimizing third-line and beyond therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer in Taiwan: an evidence-based consensus.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Salvage treatment for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has yet to be identified. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a salvage lenvatinib-based regimen for refractory mCRC. In total, 371 patients were categorized into lenvatinib-based and non-lenvatinib-based groups. In the lenvatinib-based group, patients who received lenvatinib at a dosage of 10 mg/day were categorized into lenvatinib/chemotherapy and lenvatinib/immunotherapy subgroups. We reported overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. OS1 was used to measure the time from disease progression after TAS-102 and regorafenib treatment to death, while OS2 was used to measure the time from TAS-102 or regorafenib treatment to death. Propensity score matching analysis was employed to compare the characteristics between the lenvatinib-based and non-lenvatinib-based groups. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) information was analyzed using R software. The lenvatinib-based group exhibited longer OS than did the non-lenvatinib-based group (OS1, 11.4 vs. 3.7 months; OS2, 27.2 vs. 8.2 months). The disease control rate (DCR) and objective response rate (ORR) of the lenvatinib-based regimens were 69.4% and 6.1%, respectively. Lenvatinib/chemotherapy and lenvatinib/immunotherapy had similar PFS, OS, DCR, and ORR. The adverse effects were manageable. After propensity score matching, the lenvatinib-based group continued to exhibit significantly longer OS1 and OS2 than did the non-lenvatinib-based group. NGS analysis revealed that
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.